Civilian punch

puglous · Post by **puglous** » 2007-07-02 22:38

What song is in that video?

[DVB] TRIggS · Post by **[DVB] TRIggS** » 2007-07-02 22:49

Frontline-Pillar. It says at the end credits.

trogdor1289 · Post by **trogdor1289** » 2007-07-02 22:51

and of course someone had to go there.

puglous · Post by **puglous** » 2007-07-02 22:51

:d uh:

Post by **Falkun** » 2007-07-02 22:56

Hmmm... Just imagine, civilian squads swarming a soldier and punching them.

Rambo Hunter · Post by **Rambo Hunter** » 2007-07-02 22:59

Or fisting insurgents

and yes, frontline by pillar

Taffy · Post by **Taffy** » 2007-07-02 23:01

How about a soldier can punch a civilian to knock them out if they're causing them trouble? Would be seriously good fun

WNxKenwayy · Post by **WNxKenwayy** » 2007-07-02 23:28

mammikoura wrote:^^nah. Still would be outside of ROE to kill him, even if he punched you.

No it wouldn't. Hostile threat/hostile intent. The civilian had hostile intent, aka cause harm to a soldier. He could be legally shot and killed.
Example:
I was manning a M2 at a vehicle check point on ASR Hersey. Vehicle is supposed to stop ~200m from the check point, there are signs all along the route telling them this. A white Toyota truck approached the check point, didn't slow down. At about 300m I started waving a orange VS-17 panel flag and pointing my M4 at him. Once he past 200m I dropped my M4, grabbed the M2, and fired a 3 round burst into the vehicle's, aiming low to try for a disabling shot to the vehicle. Luckily, 2 rounds struck the engine block and exited without hitting the driver (some shrapnel but nothing big). Had those rounds not stopped the vehicle or if one of the rounds struck and killed the driver, oh well. Legally I followed the ROE. Turns out the guy was worried about some wedding and wasn't paying attention. I was legally covered because he presented a 'hostile threat'.

'Hostile intent' covers the other side of shooting someone. Just because they don't pose and actual threat to you (coming at you with a baseball bat from 200m while I have a machine gun in my hands), their intent is hostile. So, they can be engaged. So for rock throwers, we can legally shoot them. Of course we don't, most of the time, use lethal rounds. We have beanbag/nerf rounds for the shotgun/M203's that we use.

Its not 'Hostile threat AND Hostile intent'. Its 'Hostile threat OR hostile intent'.

Most likely, in real life, if an Iraqi come up and hit one of us, we'd just butt stroke the shit out of his face, rough him up quite a bit, and zip cuff him to the front of our humvee while we drove back to the FOB to detain him. But since you can't do that in PR, just make him eligible to be shot then to save time/coding.

Rambo Hunter · Post by **Rambo Hunter** » 2007-07-03 00:49

Now THAT'S a realism advisory
Word something wrong and you get a whole write up on the subject

=Eclipse · Post by **=Eclipse** » 2007-07-03 05:31

Nice Idea

wushu1 · Post by **wushu1** » 2007-07-03 06:25

That just gave me the idea of including rubber bullets for firing at civies

mammikoura · Post by **mammikoura** » 2007-07-03 09:27

WNxKenwayy wrote:No it wouldn't. Hostile threat/hostile intent. The civilian had hostile intent, aka cause harm to a soldier. He could be legally shot and killed.
Example:
I was manning a M2 at a vehicle check point on ASR Hersey. Vehicle is supposed to stop ~200m from the check point, there are signs all along the route telling them this. A white Toyota truck approached the check point, didn't slow down. At about 300m I started waving a orange VS-17 panel flag and pointing my M4 at him. Once he past 200m I dropped my M4, grabbed the M2, and fired a 3 round burst into the vehicle's, aiming low to try for a disabling shot to the vehicle. Luckily, 2 rounds struck the engine block and exited without hitting the driver (some shrapnel but nothing big). Had those rounds not stopped the vehicle or if one of the rounds struck and killed the driver, oh well. Legally I followed the ROE. Turns out the guy was worried about some wedding and wasn't paying attention. I was legally covered because he presented a 'hostile threat'.

'Hostile intent' covers the other side of shooting someone. Just because they don't pose and actual threat to you (coming at you with a baseball bat from 200m while I have a machine gun in my hands), their intent is hostile. So, they can be engaged. So for rock throwers, we can legally shoot them. Of course we don't, most of the time, use lethal rounds. We have beanbag/nerf rounds for the shotgun/M203's that we use.

Its not 'Hostile threat AND Hostile intent'. Its 'Hostile threat OR hostile intent'.

Most likely, in real life, if an Iraqi come up and hit one of us, we'd just butt stroke the shit out of his face, rough him up quite a bit, and zip cuff him to the front of our humvee while we drove back to the FOB to detain him. But since you can't do that in PR, just make him eligible to be shot then to save time/coding.

okay, you probably know better than I do.

But I was just reading about this ROE stuff somewhere and if I remember correctly it was something like "use of lethal force is only allowed when the person is an immediate threat to your or your friends life"

but yeah, I could be wrong. Just sounds kinda odd for you to have permission to kill some guy just because he punched you.

Thunder · Post by **Thunder** » 2007-07-03 09:43

mammikoura wrote:
but yeah, I could be wrong. Just sounds kinda odd for you to have permission to kill some guy just because he punched you.

well it depends on the punch doesnt it

if these civies are gonna try to puch you to death, im gonna shoot them even if i do lose points

mammikoura · Post by **mammikoura** » 2007-07-03 13:30

'[R-MOD wrote:Thunder']well it depends on the punch doesnt it
if these civies are gonna try to puch you to death, im gonna shoot them even if i do lose points

well yeah, if you are attacked by a horde of civilians screaming "Allah hu Akbar" of course you will shoot. But if someone hits you once I don't think it's right to empty your mag into their head.

Maybe we could add something similar to the blur effect you get when bleeding. So when you get hit your vision is blurred for like.. 4 seconds?
That way hitting soldiers would be usefull, you could piss them off and have that 4 seconds to run away so they can't "arrest" you.
And the punch shouldn't do much if any damage.

WNxKenwayy · Post by **WNxKenwayy** » 2007-07-03 15:12

wushu1 wrote:That just gave me the idea of including rubber bullets for firing at civies

Although I am not a dev or modder or anything, I'll give this a shot

mainiack205 · Post by **mainiack205** » 2007-07-03 15:19

mammikoura wrote: if someone hits you once I don't think it's right to empty your mag into their head.

I do?

Anyway I think its an ace idea an can't believe its not already been put in the game for 0.6 that vid looked ace hehe

=UKHC=Neoteknix · Post by **=UKHC=Neoteknix** » 2007-07-03 15:52

wushu1 wrote:That just gave me the idea of including rubber bullets for firing at civies

i Like that idea.

BOOM RUBBER BULLET HEADSHOT !!!!!!!!!

Wattershed · Post by **Wattershed** » 2007-07-03 16:16

Take away all the weapons from the civilians!! Its not realistic to have the civ be able to kill an "enemy", especially when you aren't allowed to shoot no matter what!

Post by **Masaq** » 2007-07-03 17:37

You *are* allowed to shoot... it's just advisable NOT to. For example, I was lured out by a civillian the other day who came and jumped around me than ran off and behind a house, to go hide behind his mates - all holding Ak-47s.

I only pull my knife out to get a civvie at the last minute, so thankfully my rifle was still out.

Did I try and gun down the four guys with AK-47s before they spattered me all over the place?

Hell no! Last action before I got ripped appart by full-auto fire was to shoot the sneaky b*st*d in the head for encouraging me to do something so damn stupid as chase him lol.

GR34 · Post by **GR34** » 2007-07-03 19:21

OMG add a brass knuckles pick up!!!!!111!!!